Composition II: February 20th 2002
Bartleby
Nína Rúna Kvaran
Most of us have at one time or another experienced the sensation of hyper self-consciousness. The feeling of being watched by everyone or even being the victim of some kind of conspiracy has probably made itself familiar to all of us at some period in our lives. Many go through times of insecurity and paranoia, thinking the whole world is against them. It’s a miserable feeling of alienation and often afflicts those who have low self-esteem and a poor self-image.
The purpose of this essay is to look at the point of view of the narrator of Herman Melville’s short story “Bartleby the Scrivener” and show how it influences the development of the plot and theme as the story unravels. The intention is to demonstrate how the narrator’s lack of assertiveness contributes to a chain of bizarre events that create the most uncommonly and unacceptable circumstances and lead him to a state of paranoia.
“Bartleby the Scrivener” is one of the first American stories that take place in an office. It’s a 1st person narrative, the narrator being a lawyer of about sixty and the employer of four rather peculiar characters. Turkey is a red-faced elderly gentleman who works best in the mornings but gets gradually more irritable and useless as the day runs its course. Another copyist is Nippers, a young piratical-looking man that suffers from “indigestion” (most likely hangovers) in the mornings and isn’t really up to speed on anything until in the afternoon. There is also a twelve-year-old office boy that goes by the name of Ginger Nut, not to mention the eponymous character, Bartleby.
Bartleby is an excellent copyist at first, but then the narrators carefully describes how he starts “preferring” not to do things, eventually succumbing to an almost immobile state. The story deals with the narrator’s evasive reactions to Bartley’s behaviour and how his constant avoidance of conflict leads to him moving his whole office rather than being assertive enough to throw Bartleby out.
Melville wrote “Bartleby the Scrivener” in ca.1853 and the story is a good example of what professor Martin Regal calls “Melville’s compulsion to write about the un-interpretable”. When one reads the story for the first time, it’s easy to assume that Bartleby is the most important character. Of course there wouldn’t be a story to tell if it wasn’t for his peculiar existence but in fact we know almost nothing about him. He is the “un-interpretable” factor in the story because he lacks everything. Bartleby is a blank page. The only thing we know of him is the fact that he worked at a dead letter office. He is distant and cold and seems to have no emotional or social needs and even though he works very well in the beginning, these strange characteristics are already evident: “But he wrote on silently, palely, mechanically”. We know nothing about his motives or what exactly lies behind his astonishing behaviour. One day he simply starts saying “I would prefer not to” and he gradually uses that sentence more and more, eventually not doing any work and “preferring” not to leave the office! We have the descriptions of the narrator and since his behaviour has considerable influence on the plot, I think it’s justifiable to think of him as the main character.
The narrator is an easy-going fellow with a meek temperament, which is not surprising since his life’s motto is “that the easiest way of life is the best”. He explains to the reader that despite being of the infamously energetic and neurotic law profession, he has rarely let anything disturb his peace of mind. He is an extremely tolerant boss and has accepted the eccentricities of both Turkey and Nippers in the most compliant way. Instead of becoming furiously annoyed by their abnormal work ethics he tries to make the best of the situation and convinces himself that they compliment each other because when one is being useless the other one isn’t. To use his own words: “This was a good natural arrangement under the circumstances”.
It’s easy to assume that the narrator is just being a diplomat because the ability to compromise is very important for a boss. But his leniency towards Turkey and Nippers has created a situation where he is getting the work of one man for the price of two and his constant avoidance of conflict gets him into serious trouble when he has to face the most eccentric and difficult employee of them all, Bartleby.
Concerning the robot-like character of Bartleby, it’s difficult to say what exactly Melville ment him to stand for. We only know the aforementioned; that he worked at a dead letter office and that he’s an excellent copyist. In that information we have two horrible notions for any writer. Firstly, the idea of writing something that will never be read as is the fate of all the letters in the dead letter office. Secondly, the idea of never having an opportunity to be creative in writing, but to constantly copy the works of others, as is the fate of the office workers in “Bartleby”.
But whether Bartleby is a symbol for frustrated writers or not, is not the main issue here because what he represents to the narrator is more important. Is he the ultimate test for a man that constantly avoids conflicts of any kind? There seems to be a considerable amount of self-denial going on in the mind of the narrator. He tries to claim that had it been anyone else other than Bartleby, he would not have been so lenient. The truth is that he has already demonstrated that he’s extremely tolerant towards his employees and I’m sure that he would under no circumstances fly “outright into a dreadful passion” as he puts it himself, no matter how badly provoked.
Another example of his insecurities is how he constantly asks his other employees for advice on how to handle Bartleby when he first starts to refuse to do certain assignments. He says: “Accordingly, if any disinterested persons are present, he turns to them for some reinforcement for his own faltering mind.” These are the first symptoms of paranoia starting to sink in. The narrator is so flabbergasted by Bartleby’s impudent and continuous refusals that he starts to seriously doubt his own appreciation of the situation. Even when Nippers, Turkey and Ginger Nut all agree on that Bartleby’s behaviour is unacceptable and outrageous, their boss is still not courageous enough to simply let the man go or at least reprimand him. Instead he convinces himself that Bartleby’s eccentricities are involuntary and that surely he means no harm with his “preferring “ not to do things. He decides to try his best to befriend the “poor fellow” and even refers to his own, and in my opinion, very natural inclination to give Bartleby a peace of his mind, an “evil impulse”, as if standing up and using his lawful right as Bartleby’s boss to reprimand him, was something quite horrible and unthinkable.
As the situation evolves, Bartleby comes to a total stand still. His boss discovers that he is living in the office 24 hours a day but his pity for Bartleby is so great that he has immense trouble trying to fire him. It’s almost as if he believes that doing anything to upset the drone-like tranquillity of Bartleby might bring some disastrous misfortunes upon himself. As he contemplates Bartleby’s inevitable dismissal he says to himself: “…nevertheless I strangely felt something superstitious knocking at my heart, and forbidding me to carry out my purpose, and denouncing me for a villain if I dared to breathe one bitter word against this forlornest of mankind”.
Another interesting example of the increasing paranoia of the narrator is when he realises that the word “prefer” so obstinately used by Bartleby, has started to manifest itself in his own dialogues with Turkey and Nippers, almost as if it had a mind of its own. As he puts it himself: “I thought to myself, surely I must get rid of a demented man, who already has in some degree turned the tongues, if not the heads of myself and clerks”. The word “prefer” has come to symbolise all his problems with Bartleby and his own involuntary use of it is eerie, to say the least. As if Bartleby’s special kind of dementia is rubbing off on the others, spreading like an incurable infection of emptiness.
When Bartleby finally decides to give up copying all together, making himself completely useless as a scrivener in the process, but having no intention of leaving the office, the narrator finally takes the plunge and fires him, realising that Bartleby has become “…a millstone to him, not only useless as a necklace, but afflicting to bear”. He generously gives Bartleby six days to remove himself from the premises, which of course he does not. This casts another spell of hysteria over the narrator as he imagines what might happen if the situation is left to thrive like this. He sees himself being ridiculed by peers of the law profession and his reputation in ruins. He even contemplates the possibility of Bartleby “outliving him, and eventually claiming possession of his office by rights of perpetual occupancy.” The narrator has let his fears bring himself to a miserable state of paranoia but despite that, he does not face his fears but rather moves his whole office to another building so as to escape having to physically throw Bartleby out or set the police on him.
I think that there is a definite theme of how not facing one’s fears can diminish ones sense of self-worth, not to mention damage the view others have of one’s character. I’m not sure whether a different reaction from the narrator would have made any difference to Bartleby who eventually ends up in jail where he slowly starves himself to death. But as has been stated before, I don’t think Bartleby is the main issue in the story but rather how people around him handle his amazing behaviour. The narrator is so afraid to take definite action against his “office problem” that he rather goes through immense trouble avoiding conflicts and humiliates himself in the process. I doubt that anything could have been done to “save” Bartleby, his way was doomed to be a dead end almost from the start, but the narrator could have handled the situation in a manner that was more respectable for his own person. He eventually runs away from the “problem”, leaving it for others to solve, knowing full well that the police would eventually be called for. His behaviour is in fact no less perplexing than Bartleby’s. There are likely many things that can be interpreted from this story but I think that there is a moral to be found in it. It isn’t always good to be too kind and lenient to people because excessive leniency can backfire. To be able to stand up for one’s right is very important for the self-image and one is not necessarily doing people any good by constantly humouring them.
Bartleby
Nína Rúna Kvaran
Most of us have at one time or another experienced the sensation of hyper self-consciousness. The feeling of being watched by everyone or even being the victim of some kind of conspiracy has probably made itself familiar to all of us at some period in our lives. Many go through times of insecurity and paranoia, thinking the whole world is against them. It’s a miserable feeling of alienation and often afflicts those who have low self-esteem and a poor self-image.
The purpose of this essay is to look at the point of view of the narrator of Herman Melville’s short story “Bartleby the Scrivener” and show how it influences the development of the plot and theme as the story unravels. The intention is to demonstrate how the narrator’s lack of assertiveness contributes to a chain of bizarre events that create the most uncommonly and unacceptable circumstances and lead him to a state of paranoia.
“Bartleby the Scrivener” is one of the first American stories that take place in an office. It’s a 1st person narrative, the narrator being a lawyer of about sixty and the employer of four rather peculiar characters. Turkey is a red-faced elderly gentleman who works best in the mornings but gets gradually more irritable and useless as the day runs its course. Another copyist is Nippers, a young piratical-looking man that suffers from “indigestion” (most likely hangovers) in the mornings and isn’t really up to speed on anything until in the afternoon. There is also a twelve-year-old office boy that goes by the name of Ginger Nut, not to mention the eponymous character, Bartleby.
Bartleby is an excellent copyist at first, but then the narrators carefully describes how he starts “preferring” not to do things, eventually succumbing to an almost immobile state. The story deals with the narrator’s evasive reactions to Bartley’s behaviour and how his constant avoidance of conflict leads to him moving his whole office rather than being assertive enough to throw Bartleby out.
Melville wrote “Bartleby the Scrivener” in ca.1853 and the story is a good example of what professor Martin Regal calls “Melville’s compulsion to write about the un-interpretable”. When one reads the story for the first time, it’s easy to assume that Bartleby is the most important character. Of course there wouldn’t be a story to tell if it wasn’t for his peculiar existence but in fact we know almost nothing about him. He is the “un-interpretable” factor in the story because he lacks everything. Bartleby is a blank page. The only thing we know of him is the fact that he worked at a dead letter office. He is distant and cold and seems to have no emotional or social needs and even though he works very well in the beginning, these strange characteristics are already evident: “But he wrote on silently, palely, mechanically”. We know nothing about his motives or what exactly lies behind his astonishing behaviour. One day he simply starts saying “I would prefer not to” and he gradually uses that sentence more and more, eventually not doing any work and “preferring” not to leave the office! We have the descriptions of the narrator and since his behaviour has considerable influence on the plot, I think it’s justifiable to think of him as the main character.
The narrator is an easy-going fellow with a meek temperament, which is not surprising since his life’s motto is “that the easiest way of life is the best”. He explains to the reader that despite being of the infamously energetic and neurotic law profession, he has rarely let anything disturb his peace of mind. He is an extremely tolerant boss and has accepted the eccentricities of both Turkey and Nippers in the most compliant way. Instead of becoming furiously annoyed by their abnormal work ethics he tries to make the best of the situation and convinces himself that they compliment each other because when one is being useless the other one isn’t. To use his own words: “This was a good natural arrangement under the circumstances”.
It’s easy to assume that the narrator is just being a diplomat because the ability to compromise is very important for a boss. But his leniency towards Turkey and Nippers has created a situation where he is getting the work of one man for the price of two and his constant avoidance of conflict gets him into serious trouble when he has to face the most eccentric and difficult employee of them all, Bartleby.
Concerning the robot-like character of Bartleby, it’s difficult to say what exactly Melville ment him to stand for. We only know the aforementioned; that he worked at a dead letter office and that he’s an excellent copyist. In that information we have two horrible notions for any writer. Firstly, the idea of writing something that will never be read as is the fate of all the letters in the dead letter office. Secondly, the idea of never having an opportunity to be creative in writing, but to constantly copy the works of others, as is the fate of the office workers in “Bartleby”.
But whether Bartleby is a symbol for frustrated writers or not, is not the main issue here because what he represents to the narrator is more important. Is he the ultimate test for a man that constantly avoids conflicts of any kind? There seems to be a considerable amount of self-denial going on in the mind of the narrator. He tries to claim that had it been anyone else other than Bartleby, he would not have been so lenient. The truth is that he has already demonstrated that he’s extremely tolerant towards his employees and I’m sure that he would under no circumstances fly “outright into a dreadful passion” as he puts it himself, no matter how badly provoked.
Another example of his insecurities is how he constantly asks his other employees for advice on how to handle Bartleby when he first starts to refuse to do certain assignments. He says: “Accordingly, if any disinterested persons are present, he turns to them for some reinforcement for his own faltering mind.” These are the first symptoms of paranoia starting to sink in. The narrator is so flabbergasted by Bartleby’s impudent and continuous refusals that he starts to seriously doubt his own appreciation of the situation. Even when Nippers, Turkey and Ginger Nut all agree on that Bartleby’s behaviour is unacceptable and outrageous, their boss is still not courageous enough to simply let the man go or at least reprimand him. Instead he convinces himself that Bartleby’s eccentricities are involuntary and that surely he means no harm with his “preferring “ not to do things. He decides to try his best to befriend the “poor fellow” and even refers to his own, and in my opinion, very natural inclination to give Bartleby a peace of his mind, an “evil impulse”, as if standing up and using his lawful right as Bartleby’s boss to reprimand him, was something quite horrible and unthinkable.
As the situation evolves, Bartleby comes to a total stand still. His boss discovers that he is living in the office 24 hours a day but his pity for Bartleby is so great that he has immense trouble trying to fire him. It’s almost as if he believes that doing anything to upset the drone-like tranquillity of Bartleby might bring some disastrous misfortunes upon himself. As he contemplates Bartleby’s inevitable dismissal he says to himself: “…nevertheless I strangely felt something superstitious knocking at my heart, and forbidding me to carry out my purpose, and denouncing me for a villain if I dared to breathe one bitter word against this forlornest of mankind”.
Another interesting example of the increasing paranoia of the narrator is when he realises that the word “prefer” so obstinately used by Bartleby, has started to manifest itself in his own dialogues with Turkey and Nippers, almost as if it had a mind of its own. As he puts it himself: “I thought to myself, surely I must get rid of a demented man, who already has in some degree turned the tongues, if not the heads of myself and clerks”. The word “prefer” has come to symbolise all his problems with Bartleby and his own involuntary use of it is eerie, to say the least. As if Bartleby’s special kind of dementia is rubbing off on the others, spreading like an incurable infection of emptiness.
When Bartleby finally decides to give up copying all together, making himself completely useless as a scrivener in the process, but having no intention of leaving the office, the narrator finally takes the plunge and fires him, realising that Bartleby has become “…a millstone to him, not only useless as a necklace, but afflicting to bear”. He generously gives Bartleby six days to remove himself from the premises, which of course he does not. This casts another spell of hysteria over the narrator as he imagines what might happen if the situation is left to thrive like this. He sees himself being ridiculed by peers of the law profession and his reputation in ruins. He even contemplates the possibility of Bartleby “outliving him, and eventually claiming possession of his office by rights of perpetual occupancy.” The narrator has let his fears bring himself to a miserable state of paranoia but despite that, he does not face his fears but rather moves his whole office to another building so as to escape having to physically throw Bartleby out or set the police on him.
I think that there is a definite theme of how not facing one’s fears can diminish ones sense of self-worth, not to mention damage the view others have of one’s character. I’m not sure whether a different reaction from the narrator would have made any difference to Bartleby who eventually ends up in jail where he slowly starves himself to death. But as has been stated before, I don’t think Bartleby is the main issue in the story but rather how people around him handle his amazing behaviour. The narrator is so afraid to take definite action against his “office problem” that he rather goes through immense trouble avoiding conflicts and humiliates himself in the process. I doubt that anything could have been done to “save” Bartleby, his way was doomed to be a dead end almost from the start, but the narrator could have handled the situation in a manner that was more respectable for his own person. He eventually runs away from the “problem”, leaving it for others to solve, knowing full well that the police would eventually be called for. His behaviour is in fact no less perplexing than Bartleby’s. There are likely many things that can be interpreted from this story but I think that there is a moral to be found in it. It isn’t always good to be too kind and lenient to people because excessive leniency can backfire. To be able to stand up for one’s right is very important for the self-image and one is not necessarily doing people any good by constantly humouring them.
posted by Jóna Rúna @ 9:58 e.h.
0 Comments:
Skrifa ummæli
<< Home